Its been an interesting old week. I was lucky enough to be asked to speak at Christchurch’s local TedX ChCh on Saturday 3 October. I have uploaded the presentation to my website (with notes). A truly terrifying experience but amazing. And if you read the notes you can see how I actually intended to finish the presentation – a wee panic at the end sadly. The actual presentation itself will be uploaded in three weeks or so for ever onto YouTube.
This then resulted in a piece in The Press on Monday, http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/72681419/social-services-not-sexy-enough-for-grant-money which again generated some interest, and some negative stuff. Someone has accused me of not doing the research, and that it takes $25k to generate a $10k grant. I do think he is talking at cross purposes: in the speech my comment was it takes at least $200k going into the machine to generate a $10,000 grant.
I triple checked my numbers, and also found an interesting picture on page 6 of the 2014 NZCT Annual Report: 90.5 cents in the dollar goes back to the punter, 3.8 cents to grants, 1.5 cents to operating costs, 1.6 cents to the venue, and 2.6 cents to the Government. And, as I said, most the money goes back to the punter. His comment is about the gross profit after gaming proceeds. This is equally valid, but a different measure. The headline of course was designed for clicks, and was never something I said.
And I wish I was “obscenely paid”. This is some weird hobby I am developing, and yes I am trying to develop a bit of a profile in this space, but only because it seems no one else seems to be looking at it, and I think we should!
I am a bit sad that this is coming across as anti sport. I received a lovely email from a woman who has had a long history in sport, who sort of confirmed what I felt. In the eighties and even nineties, the kids in her club did things like sausage sizzles, selling fertiliser and all those community sorts of things. It was hard work, but built communities. And the kids came away with a sense of achievement having worked hard for things without entitlement. And isn’t that what we criticise today’s youth about? Her words in italics: “Those who provide grants need to get 100% smarter checking on accountability and sport needs to get off it's collective butt and do something for itself.”
We have been involved with a footie club for five years, with numbers since the earthquake growing around 25% year on year. The balance sheet is now fairly healthy, funded on subs and a generous local business who buys our shirts. And if people can’t afford it, there are some ways around the sub. Our kids compete aganst teams with flash stuff, like names on the back of their shirts. I see the kids loving being on the field: they love to compete, and they also love playing with the coaches, be they their own parents or someone elses.
If people do have some reaction to the model, then perhaps they can voice these concerns to their own clubs. Stand up and volunteer yourselves. Seek out clubs which don’t have different funding models. Organise quiz nights. Find some great skills in your own membership base.
Anyway – some fabulous people have got in touch, so I guess we shall see where this all ends up from here. Any thoughts??
This then resulted in a piece in The Press on Monday, http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/72681419/social-services-not-sexy-enough-for-grant-money which again generated some interest, and some negative stuff. Someone has accused me of not doing the research, and that it takes $25k to generate a $10k grant. I do think he is talking at cross purposes: in the speech my comment was it takes at least $200k going into the machine to generate a $10,000 grant.
I triple checked my numbers, and also found an interesting picture on page 6 of the 2014 NZCT Annual Report: 90.5 cents in the dollar goes back to the punter, 3.8 cents to grants, 1.5 cents to operating costs, 1.6 cents to the venue, and 2.6 cents to the Government. And, as I said, most the money goes back to the punter. His comment is about the gross profit after gaming proceeds. This is equally valid, but a different measure. The headline of course was designed for clicks, and was never something I said.
And I wish I was “obscenely paid”. This is some weird hobby I am developing, and yes I am trying to develop a bit of a profile in this space, but only because it seems no one else seems to be looking at it, and I think we should!
I am a bit sad that this is coming across as anti sport. I received a lovely email from a woman who has had a long history in sport, who sort of confirmed what I felt. In the eighties and even nineties, the kids in her club did things like sausage sizzles, selling fertiliser and all those community sorts of things. It was hard work, but built communities. And the kids came away with a sense of achievement having worked hard for things without entitlement. And isn’t that what we criticise today’s youth about? Her words in italics: “Those who provide grants need to get 100% smarter checking on accountability and sport needs to get off it's collective butt and do something for itself.”
We have been involved with a footie club for five years, with numbers since the earthquake growing around 25% year on year. The balance sheet is now fairly healthy, funded on subs and a generous local business who buys our shirts. And if people can’t afford it, there are some ways around the sub. Our kids compete aganst teams with flash stuff, like names on the back of their shirts. I see the kids loving being on the field: they love to compete, and they also love playing with the coaches, be they their own parents or someone elses.
If people do have some reaction to the model, then perhaps they can voice these concerns to their own clubs. Stand up and volunteer yourselves. Seek out clubs which don’t have different funding models. Organise quiz nights. Find some great skills in your own membership base.
Anyway – some fabulous people have got in touch, so I guess we shall see where this all ends up from here. Any thoughts??
RSS Feed